ArticleReanimation : journal de la Societe de reanimation de langue francaise2014
[Which samples to obtain in the emergency department for the microbiological diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia in the immunocompetent patient?]
Article in Reanimation : journal de la Societe de reanimation de langue francaise, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current diagnostic methods allow microbial identification in 50% of patients admitted with severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Guidelines derived from epidemiological data help physicians to start empirical antimicrobial therapy. Definitive microbial diagnosis is useful to guide further pathogen-directed therapy. Blood cultures, cultures of respiratory specimens and urine antigen tests are recommended to determine the causative bacterial pathogen. Positive blood cultures range from 15 to 25% of CAP patients according to severity. Whether sputum specimens represent or not lower respiratory secretions determines its accuracy in CAP microbial diagnosis. In intubated patients, endotracheal aspirates are often of interest. Detection of positive pneumococcal or legionella urinary antigen is often associated with CAP severity. The sensitivity of this test is not decreased in patients who have received antibiotics prior to sampling. Viral pneumonia account for 10 to 40% of severe CAP. Nasal swabs are recommended for influenza identification using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in order to deliver oseltamivir treatment. In the emergency department, atypical pneumonia serology is less useful than respiratory specimens obtained using fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Serum PCR to diagnose bacterial CAP is not superior to the other usual methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.